South Africa Case Law

Olympus Mobile (Pty) Ltd and Another v Access Bank South Africa Limited (098194/2025)

Olympus Mobile (Pty) Ltd and Another v Access Bank South Africa Limited (098194/2025) [2025] ZAGPJHC 688 (4 July 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

098194/2025

Judge

Allen

The application was struck from the roll for want of urgency. The applicants failed to demonstrate that the matter was urgent, as they delayed in seeking relief and continued correspondence with the respondent for weeks before approaching the court. Furthermore, the applicants did not exhaust alternative remedies available under the master services agreement, specifically arbitration. The requirements for a final interdict were not met, as the applicants failed to establish a clear right, actual or apprehended injury, and the absence of a satisfactory alternative remedy. The balance of conven…

Source excerpt

• Master Services Agreement
• Urgent Interdict
• National Payment Systems Act
• Set Off
• Fraudulent Transactions
• Final Interdict Requirements

Mabhekane Trading CC v Koopmansfontein Communal Property Association and Another (3/2025)

Mabhekane Trading CC v Koopmansfontein Communal Property Association and Another (3/2025) [2025] ZANCHC 50 (16 May 2025)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

3/2025

Judge

M C Mamosebo

The High Court discharged a rule nisi and refused final interdictory relief, finding no clear right, no proved ongoing injury, and no lack of alternative remedy.

• Lease Agreement Termination
• Final Interdict Requirements
• Breach Of Contract
• Authority Of Attorney
• Final-interdict
• Rule-nisi

Hillhouse v Pidelta (Pty) Ltd and Another (1237/2024P)

Hillhouse v Pidelta (Pty) Ltd and Another (1237/2024P) [2024] ZAKZPHC 57 (29 July 2024)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

1237/2024P

Judge

Mossop

Urgent application to compel pension benefit payment dismissed. The court held the applicant had not shown a clear right, and the fund lawfully withheld payment under section 37D.

• Pension Funds Act Section 37d
• Withholding Of Pension Benefits
• Final Interdict Requirements
• Disciplinary Dismissal
• Fiduciary Duty Breach
• Alternative Remedy Pension Fund Adjudicator

Pitso and Others v Chabeli Molatoli Attorneys Incorporated (420/2023)

Pitso and Others v Chabeli Molatoli Attorneys Incorporated (420/2023) [2024] ZASCA 94 (12 June 2024)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

420/2023

Judges

Schippers, Mokgohloa, Mabindla-Boqwana, Dawood, Seegobin

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the principal, Mrs Pitso, was entitled at common law to terminate the mandate of the respondent attorney firm at will. The respondent failed to establish the requirements for a final interdict, specifically a clear right and the absence of an adequate alternative remedy. The respondent's remedy, if any, lies in a claim for damages for fees, not in compelling retention as agent. The cross-appeal was fatally defective and not competent. The order of the High Court was set aside and substituted with dismissal of the application with costs.

Source excerpt

• Agency Termination
• Mandate Revocation
• Final Interdict Requirements
• Attorney Client Fee Dispute

SA Heritage Resources Agency and Others v Mandela and Others (15867/2022)

SA Heritage Resources Agency and Others v Mandela and Others (15867/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 278 (20 March 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

15867/2022

Judges

Baqwa, Ngalwana, Ramawele

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal, finding no reasonable prospects of success and no compelling reason to hear it.

• National Heritage Resources Act
• Heritage Object Declaration
• Final Interdict Requirements
• Interpretation Of Statutes
• Leave-to-appeal
• Heritage-object-dispute

Cream Magenta 98 (Pty) Limited and Another v Grindrod Bank Limited and Another (2022/6023 ; 2022/14299 ; 2022/14300)

Cream Magenta 98 (Pty) Limited and Another v Grindrod Bank Limited and Another (2022/6023 ; 2022/14299 ; 2022/14300) [2023] ZAGPJHC 682 (6 June 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2022/6023 ; 2022/14299 ; 2022/14300

Judge

B.C. Wanless

The High Court dismissed an interdict against Grindrod Bank and granted final winding-up orders against the two applicant companies for commercial insolvency.

• Mortgage Bond Enforcement
• Company Liquidation
• Commercial Insolvency
• Final Interdict Requirements
• Creditor Rights
• Deeds Registries Act

Exxaro Coal Mpumalanga (Pty) Ltd v TDS Projects Construction and Newrak Mining JV (Pty) Ltd and Another (169/2021)

Exxaro Coal Mpumalanga (Pty) Ltd v TDS Projects Construction and Newrak Mining JV (Pty) Ltd and Another (169/2021) [2022] ZASCA 76 (27 May 2022)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

169/2021

Judges

Schippers, Nicholls, Gorven, Mabindla-Boqwana, Meyer

The SCA held that TDS failed to justify an interdict stopping payment under a demand guarantee, because no injury was proved and a remedy was available.

• Demand Guarantee
• Interdict
• Performance Guarantee
• Banker Customer Relationship
• Final Interdict Requirements
• Demand-guarantee

Pholo v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (J 818/20)

Pholo v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (J 818/20) [2020] ZALCJHB 192 (31 August 2020)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J 818/20

Judge

Mahosi

The Labour Court dismissed an urgent application to stop a CCMA arbitration, holding the applicant had not shown urgency or grounds for a final interdict.

• Urgent Interdict
• Jurisdiction Of Ccma
• Unfair Dismissal
• Final Interdict Requirements
• Urgent-interdict
• Ccma-jurisdiction

AA Solwandle Attorneys Incorporated v Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (1093/2019)

AA Solwandle Attorneys Incorporated v Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (1093/2019) [2019] ZAECPEHC 62 (25 September 2019)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth

Case number

1093/2019

Judge

G H Bloem

The High Court dismissed an application to compel the municipality to resolve a tender objection, holding the supply chain policy gave no such enforceable right.

• Municipal Supply Chain Management
• Mandatory Interdict
• Alternative Remedy
• Final Interdict Requirements
• Mandatory-interdict
• Final-interdict

Desert Palace Hotel Resort (Pty) Ltd v Deeps Betting Grounds (Pty) Ltd and Another (1698/2019)

Desert Palace Hotel Resort (Pty) Ltd v Deeps Betting Grounds (Pty) Ltd and Another (1698/2019) [2019] ZANCHC 38 (30 August 2019)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1698/2019

Judge

Sieberhagen

The High Court granted an urgent interdict against unlicensed gambling operations at 23 Scott Street, Upington, holding the respondent had no valid issued licence.

• Gambling Licensing
• Interdict
• Unlawful Competition
• Regulation 7c
• Final Interdict Requirements
• Gambling-licensing